https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94549 NCLAT allowed the appeal filed by the Operational Creditor and set aside the Adjudicating Authority's order dated 25.08.2023 rejecting the Section 9 IBC application. It held that, based on six underlying agreements and contemporaneous e-mails, the Corporate Debtor had clearly admitted liability and default in payment of operational debt exceeding the statutory threshold of Rs. 1 lakh (as applicable in 2019), including interest computed as per contract. The absence of rental invoices and the plea of mutual pre-termination were found to be a feeble defence, not amounting to a pre-existing dispute. NCLAT further held that the Section 8 demand notice and Section 9 application were duly compliant with IBC requirements. Consequently, the Section 9 application stands restored for admission and initiation of CIRP against the Corporate Debtor. en-us Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:27 +0530 Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94549 NCLAT allowed the appeal filed by the Operational Creditor and set aside the Adjudicating Authority's order dated 25.08.2023 rejecting the Section 9 IBC application. It held that, based on six underlying agreements and contemporaneous e-mails, the Corporate Debtor had clearly admitted liability and default in payment of operational debt exceeding the statutory threshold of Rs. 1 lakh (as applicable in 2019), including interest computed as per contract. The absence of rental invoices and the plea of mutual pre-termination were found to be a feeble defence, not amounting to a pre-existing dispute. NCLAT further held that the Section 8 demand notice and Section 9 application were duly compliant with IBC requirements. Consequently, the Section 9 application stands restored for admission and initiation of CIRP against the Corporate Debtor. Highlights IBC Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:27 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94549